From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1427 invoked from network); 24 Jun 1998 16:37:57 -0000 Received: from math.gatech.edu (list@130.207.146.50) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 24 Jun 1998 16:37:57 -0000 Received: (from list@localhost) by math.gatech.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA15821; Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:29:54 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:29:54 -0400 (EDT) From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <980624091713.ZM4823@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:17:12 -0700 In-Reply-To: <9806240851.AA45920@ibmth.df.unipi.it> Comments: In reply to Peter Stephenson "Re: zsh exits suddenly." (Jun 24, 10:51am) References: <9806240851.AA45920@ibmth.df.unipi.it> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0b.820 20aug96) To: Peter Stephenson Subject: Re: zsh exits suddenly. Cc: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu (Zsh hackers list) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"BEmny3.0.8t3.1cIar"@math> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/4163 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu On Jun 24, 10:51am, Peter Stephenson wrote: } Subject: Re: zsh exits suddenly. } } I can't be absolutely sure if all that lastc stuff is really needed. } It means, of course, that if there is more than one line in the } buffer, only the current one is flushed. Is this the right behaviour? This isn't changed by your patch, right? It was the behavior all along? I think the intent is to prevent accept-line from executing a partial line following a tty interrupt. That probably ought to apply to multi- line buffers as well. The guideline should probably be, what does ZLE do to a multiline buffer when send-break is executed? The SIGINT handler ought to do the same thing. (In fact, why doesn't it call sendbreak() when ZLE is active?) -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com